Sliding rule should only apply to guys who do slide into someone’s legs, not penalise guys who are already down getting the ball.

Is there ANYONE who likes the “take the legs” rule/interpretation?

The existing rules already covered Lindsay Thomas sliding stops-forward into a victim. It’s pathetic the AFL won’t admit they made a mistake with this change. Saving face is apparently more important than not ruining the game.

That’s funny you would think the umpires main priority is umpiring a fair game 1st for the best game for everyone.
Starting to be really suspicious of umpires because the amount of times they were out 0f position to properly umpire the game the other night…well my Grandma could cover the ground better than they did.

I know many Blitzers may come up for the Gabba game. I have never met or seen 1. In past years I thought it was a good idea to say Is anyone a Bomber Blitzer?
Found out no one replied, so it might have been a bad idea. Last year I walked around saying Hail Hirdy! Found this to be useless, terrible idea.
This year I have no idea so I’m going ■■■■■■ off my nut and if I hear any1 calling out Blitzers or Hail Hirdy…I’ll smile and think g that’s nice!

They never admit to any mistakes, just double down to create more problems to cover the mistakes. If they just enforced the rules they have the game would be better.

I also hate that they experiment with bullshit stuff in the pre season like AFL X, Outside 50 goals and not real rules application which could give them some indication of how it will effect the season.

i.e. They could enforce the incorrect disposal in isolation to everything else and see what happens. Instead they change ten rules and you have no idea what impact any of them had.

I don’t think the reduced rotations or less players will change anything, they will just strip more weight off the players and increase the endurance again.

Sliding rule should only apply to guys who do slide into someone’s legs, not penalise guys who are already down getting the ball.

Is there ANYONE who likes the “take the legs” rule/interpretation?

The existing rules already covered Lindsay Thomas sliding stops-forward into a victim. It’s pathetic the AFL won’t admit they made a mistake with this change. Saving face is apparently more important than not ruining the game.

The problem is they pay it even if there wasn’t sliding or some kind of movement toward the ball that leads to contact. Too often it is being paid against a guy who gets there first and is over the ball when an opponent trips over him

Nick Bowen
FOUR field umpires will officiate every game in rounds 13 and 14 in a trial that could be adopted on a full-time basis next season.

Four field umpires were trialed in AFL games late in the 2015 home and away season and over the next two seasons were used over the three bye rounds.

AFL football operations manager Steve Hocking announced on Tuesday this year’s trial would deploy the umpires in a different structure, in a move he hoped could identify a way to extend the careers of the game’s best officiators.

“In the past what we’ve tended to do is put that extra set of eyes around where all the numbers are,” Hocking said.

"(In this trial) there will actually be an officiating umpire within the forward 50 and the back 50 and there will be two central umpires as well.

"The other extension of that is we’ve got really, really good umpires, we’ve got some elite decision-makers, and as their age profile changes are we able to keep them in the game? Can they become umpires that are able to run less but retain their experience in the game?

"We’re going to collect a lot of data on the back of this. All the umpires will have GPS (monitors) and (we’ll) see if that layout, that structure, across the ground decreases their load as well.

“Does it also give us the ability to introduce younger umpires at either end of the ground? Potentially that might be one of the upsides to it and a bit of mentoring can go on with that.”

Hocking ruled out this year’s trial being extended beyond round 14, but said the League would consider implementing four field umpires from next season.

Hocking said umpires’ total running loads had not changed significantly in past four-man trials, but they had done less high-intensity running.

The AFL footy boss was not concerned having an umpire stationed in each forward 50 would lead to a spike in technical kicks, pointing out that there had no escalation in free kicks since the League’s memo to clubs last month on defences illegally blocking in marking contests.

Sliding rule should only apply to guys who do slide into someone’s legs, not penalise guys who are already down getting the ball.

Sliding in could easily be caught under dangerous play IMO. You’re effectively kicking someone. All started because of the AFL being scared to banhammer one of their golden boys (as we’re seeing with Fyfe’s hits and saw with Judd).

I’d rather they radically reduce the number of interchanges. Just so it becomes physically impossible to have everybody on the ball all day.

I’ve often wondered what removing interchange and bringing back subsitutes/reserves would do. My thoughts are players would be forced to play to position more. Not sure why this hasn’t been thrown up as an idea. No doubt people will cite potential increases to injury but there are many other codes where this works. Difficulty is establishing how many substitutions you could make and things like concussion.

The other alternative is like what you suggest radical reduction in interchange numbers. The current cap is ridiculous as it doesn’t actually achieve anything. Bring it down to 20 moves per match or something. Tactics of using your allocated changes would be great to watch!

expand the bench to 6, allow the 6 on the bench to substitute a player during the quarter, but once you are off you are off for the rest of the quarter, same again for each quarter, no other interchanges or substitutions (but with some kind of special mechanism - to be devised- for injury/concussion).

expand the bench to 6, allow the 6 on the bench to substitute a player during the quarter, but once you are off you are off for the rest of the quarter, same again for each quarter, no other interchanges or substitutions (but with some kind of special mechanism - to be devised- for injury/concussion).

With an injury/emergency only sub, i thought a good way to get around any exploitation would be that if a player gets subbed with an injury and is then able to get up to play next week, they must start as the injury substitute the next week.
While sides might still feign injury to use the injury sub, they would have to think carefully about it… you dont want teams resting top players in the last qrt using the sub…
Also injury sub is cut off 5minutes into the last qrt or just end of 3rd qrt.
And i think therer should be 2 emergency subs.
And the subs can also come on for Concussion tests.
Also would have very serious penalties for those who abuse the system. (removal of premiership points) Its strictly for injury.

I have seen alot of games where sides get 2 injurys early and its just becomes a war of attrition in endurance… i hate that. game really needs an emergency sub.